The following historical overview is based primarily on James Horley’s 2014 article: “The Emergence and Development of Psychopathy.” Page numbers are provided for direct quotations and specific information drawn from the article.

1800s

In the 1800s, several psychiatrists and physicians began classifying particular characteristics in their patients. These concepts later developed the behavior patterns associated with psychopathy.

Philippe Pinel (1801)

A French medical director of insane asylums who used the term manie sans de´lire, to describe his patients displaying “mania without delusion, or psychological disturbance without thought-disorder” (Horley, 2014, p.93). Pinel did not address the moral and ethical disturbances of his patients, which we now know is a major aspect of psychopathy. Although Pinel is frequently discussed in histories of psychopathy, Horley notes that there is no direct connection between Pinel's work and the later concept of psychopathy.

However, Pinel is associated with the development of more humane approaches to the treatment of institutionalized patients by foregoing the use of whips and chains to control and punish patients.

James Cowles Prichard (1830s–1840s)

An English physician who studied various psychiatric disorders, particularly their relationship to English common law. His work developed of the concept of moral insanity that, as cited by Horley, described “a disorder which affects only the feelings and affections, or what are termed the moral powers of the mind, in contradistinction to the powers of the understanding or intellect” (p.95).

Although Prichard was using the term moral to describe a disturbance of one’s emotional capacities rather than one’s ability to determine right from wrong, he was frequently misunderstood. His word choice contributed to a long-running debate that, unfortunately, focused on the term rather than studying the actual disease.

Ernst von Feuchtersleben (1847)

German psychiatrist who first introduced the term psychopathy to describe what he called “diseases of personality (insanity in the more comprehensive sense)” (as cited in Horley, p.92). Horley goes on to describe the original meaning as the individual having “significant disturbances of mood and thought” and seemed to include all complex psychological problems, though Feuchtersleben did not study the causes.

Julius Ludwig August Koch (late 1800s)

A German psychiatrist who studied different forms of mental and personality disorders in the 1880s and 1890s. In 1891, he coined the term psychopathic inferiority, referring to dysfunctional patterns of living that were persistent and long-term. The phrase later became associated with personality disorders that were more well-known after Koch’s life (p.96).

1900s

Research in the 1900s provided the basis of how we view psychopathy today, specifically the modern checklist used in assessment instruments

Emil Kraepelin (early 1900s)

A German psychiatrist who developed systems for classifying mental disorders. In his 1907 psychiatry textbook, Kraepelin included a chapter on what he called “psychopathic personalities,” that had four distinct subtypes: the “born criminal”, “the unstable”, “the morbid liars and swindlers”, and “pseudoquerulants” (individuals that are paranoid but not delusional who seek justice for perceived wrongdoings done to them) (p.96).

Kraepelin’s work connected personality characteristics with antisocial and criminal behavior and inspired another German psychiatrist, Kurt Schneider, to develop a 10-sub-type system of psychopathic personalities (p.97).

George Partridge (1920s–1930s)

American psychiatrist who studied people in forensic hospitals, particularly through their own writings. He thought the term psychopathic personality was used too broadly, and was the first to use the term sociopathy, which focused on the “abnormal reaction to abnormal social conditions” (p.97) that these individuals expressed. His approach focused on antisocial behaviors that he thought were caused by societal influences, rather than focusing on the personality characteristics.

Hervey Cleckley (1940s onward)

American psychiatrist who published The Mask of Sanity in 1941. His work became enormously influential in shaping the modern understanding of psychopathy.

Horley (2014) describes Cleckley’s work on classifying psychopaths as being

“antisocial or at least asocial loner…completely self-preoccupied and totally unconcerned about the harm that [they] may inflict on others in the pursuit of their own interests…[possessing] superficial charm in order to manipulate others but generally lacked any real social intelligence or ability to learn from their mistakes…lack the ability to perceive the difference between truth and falsehood….without any sense of responsibility and any sense of guilt, lacking an ability to accept any blame for their own actions.” (p.100)

He did not equate psychopathy to crime, but noted that psychopaths did not care about consequences and were not deterred by them.

Robert Hare (1970s–Present Day)

A psychologist from the University of British Columbia who extensively built on Cleckley’s work. He created the Psychopathy Checklist (PCL) in 1980 that was later revised (PCL-R) in 1991. This is an assessment tool that measures low, medium, or high levels of psychopathy, particularly within the criminal system. Along with Cleckley, Hare also did not equate psychopathy to crime.

Click here to read more about how the PCL-R is used as an assessment instrument.

Hare's work helped standardize the psychopathy assessment framework. The PCL-R allowed clinicians and researchers to evaluate psychopathic traits more systematically than earlier, primarily descriptive approaches.

Modern Criticism

Jennifer Skeem & John Cooke (2010)

Skeem and Cooke are some that criticize the use of the PCL-R. They questioned Hare’s understanding of psychopathy, particularly about his views of the criminality aspect. They argue that there is “more evidence to view criminal behaviour as a correlate of psychopathy rather than an essential component,”p.104).

Together, these developments show how the concept of psychopathy changed from general descriptions of psychological and personality disturbances into a more comprehensive construct, even though debate still continues.